Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate over which surgical technique is the safest for brow elevation. OBJECTIVES: The authors outline complication rates for a variety of open and endoscopic browlift techniques based on the results of a literature review. METHODS: The following databases were searched to capture relevant studies: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science, Cochrane Libraries, controlled-trials.com, and clinicaltrials.gov. Eighty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Assuming between-study heterogeneity due to the limitations and biases inherent to case series, a random-effects model was used to calculate weighted proportions. Pooled weighted proportions with 95% confidence intervals were determined. RESULTS: All open and endoscopic procedures are associated with a variety of complications. Unacceptable scarring and paresthesia are the most common complications among all surgical browlifts. For anterior hairline incision with subcutaneous dissection, alopecia occurred in 8.5% of patients, paresthesia in 5.4%, unacceptable scarring in 2.1%, and skin necrosis in 1.8%. For coronal incision with subgaleal dissection, unacceptable scarring occurred in 3.6% of patients, hematoma in 0.5%, and infection in 0.2%. Endoscopic techniques with subperiosteal dissection had the highest complication rates: 6.2% for paresthesia, 3.6% for asymmetry, 3.0% for alopecia, and 2.7% for lagophthalmos. CONCLUSIONS: Although complication rates vary with respect to incision site and plane of dissection, endoscopic techniques are associated with a larger variety of complications than open approaches. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limitations inherent to a case series. A well-designed comparative study is needed to evaluate the "true" rate of complications among the various browlift techniques.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Byun et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: